Heading to trial in California

[Family Court Strategies: When Your Partner Has BPD OR NPD Traits.]

Married 27 years to a uBPDw, s23, d18. Filed for divorce February 2011. I've spent $17.5k in lawyer fees so far; additional $10k estimated for trial. Over the last two years, we’ve had two settlement conferences (SC) at the lawyer’s office, and two SC’s with the judge. I’ve been pushing for trial because I know she will never settle outside of court. At our last SC, she asked the judge to mandate one more SC at the lawyer’s office. We asked the judge to just set a date for trial. The judge gave us both, one more attempt to settle and a trial date in April.

I’m already aware of everything they have to offer. I think my chances are better with the judge. This next SC is a waste of time and money. But my lawyer says we can’t refuse when the judge suggests (mandates) another SC.

We’ve already told them where we stand on the issues (via letters and emails) but they never respond. For example, she’s claiming $40k in various reimbursements. Some of her claims are valid medical expenses for d18 and I’ve agreed to pay them, but many of her claims are things like allowance and cell phone for d18 while I was paying CS. We’ve explained that my Watt’s credits and other reimbursements far exceed her claims and I’ve agreed to call the whole thing a wash. They pretend to not hear us and just keeping pounding the table asking me to fork over $40k.

How can I keep this SC from dragging on for hours? I think one hour is more than enough time but if the judge mandated it, I’m afraid to be the one that ends it. I was thinking to start off the meeting by reading a statement that clarifies my position on the negotiations. Remind them that I’ve heard everything they have to offer, and if it isn’t new, I don’t need to hear it again.

[theodore]

Married 27 years to a uBPDw, s23, d18. Filed for divorce February 2011. I've spent $17.5k in lawyer fees so far; additional $10k estimated for trial. Over the last two years, we’ve had two settlement conferences (SC) at the lawyer’s office, and two SC’s with the judge. I’ve been pushing for trial because I know she will never settle outside of court. At our last SC, she asked the judge to mandate one more SC at the lawyer’s office. We asked the judge to just set a date for trial. The judge gave us both, one more attempt to settle and a trial date in April.

I’m already aware of everything they have to offer. I think my chances are better with the judge. This next SC is a waste of time and money. But my lawyer says we can’t refuse when the judge suggests (mandates) another SC.

We’ve already told them where we stand on the issues (via letters and emails) but they never respond. For example, she’s claiming $40k in various reimbursements. Some of her claims are valid medical expenses for d18 and I’ve agreed to pay them, but many of her claims are things like allowance and cell phone for d18 while I was paying CS. We’ve explained that my Watt’s credits and other reimbursements far exceed her claims and I’ve agreed to call the whole thing a wash. They pretend to not hear us and just keeping pounding the table asking me to fork over $40k.

How can I keep this SC from dragging on for hours? I think one hour is more than enough time but if the judge mandated it, I’m afraid to be the one that ends it. I was thinking to start off the meeting by reading a statement that clarifies my position on the negotiations. Remind them that I’ve heard everything they have to offer, and if it isn’t new, I don’t need to hear it again.

[seeking balance]

every time you respond, you are asking for sanctions under section 271, right?

If you are reasonable under the law in your settlement - the only other bargaining chip you have is sanctions for attorney fees.

[ForeverDad]

I’m already aware of everything they have to offer. I think my chances are better with the judge. This next SC is a waste of time and money. But my lawyer says we can’t refuse when the judge suggests (mandates) another SC.

I agree.   But did the judge state how long you had to stay for the settlement conference?  (Who, knows, when you get up to leave - and flatly state there WILL be a trial and NO last minute SC, they may suddenly negotiate.  Without firm boundaries and limits, she'll just keep pushing for pushing's sake.

Maybe you or your lawyer can ask what is new from the last SC.  If they start to go into the same details, let your lawyer stop them and ask again (and again as many times as it takes) for them to state just what's different.  Once that's done for a few times, look at your lawyer, say "there's nothing new, still an impasse" and let your lawyer concur and say "SC is ended, we tried, it failed again... .  No more conferences... .  See you in court for the trial."

What is that?  15 minutes?  A half hour?  An hour?  If there is no progress, then there's absolutely no reason to keep on for hours.  Billing kept low, your blood pressure less problematic, ex frustrated.

Remember, a real settlement often only happens just before the trial when no more delays and obstructions are possible.  My ex wasn't ready to settle until Trial Morning and I didn't know until I arrived less than 5 minutes before the scheduled start for the trial.

Beware too of her agreeing to something and then by the time you get into court to make the agreement final as an order, she has decided to renege or renegotiate.  Judges often let them do that.  Talk with your lawyer how to avoid that type of delay scenario.  We advise here to never cancel a scheduled date, not even a trial, based on promises that can be withdrawn.  If that happens then you're back where you started - and this time without a trial date.

[Matt]

every time you respond, you are asking for sanctions under section 271, right?

If you are reasonable under the law in your settlement - the only other bargaining chip you have is sanctions for attorney fees.

SB, you're referring to this?  www.law.onecle.com/california/family/271.html

I wonder how that works - wait til the end, after the case is decided, and present the court with all the evidence that the other side didn't act in good faith?

Or do you need to bring up this Section 271 issue each time it's relevant - not waiting til the case is over?

(I think in my state you have to wait til the end, but I'm not sure.)

I think FD's approach is good.  You can even ask for their proposal in advance, and let them know that if they have no new proposal to make, the settlement conference will be a waste of time.  And/or start the meeting with such a request:  "So what are you prepared to offer that is different than what you have offered before?"

It may be worthwhile to also work out your own proposal - not offer it if they will offer one - but if there nothing at all on the table, be prepared with a written proposal.  Make sure you can support each point of the proposal with court guidelines or a very solid fairness argument.  Make sure there are some issues you are still willing to give on - maybe even some obvious ones so they can fight about those and leave the stuff that's more important to you alone.

If you give them a chance to make a proposal, and/or you make one, and it's clear that a settlement isn't going to happen that day, then I think it would be wise to end it.  Maybe have a signal you can give to your attorney, meaning, "Wrap it up."

I wouldn't assume, though, that one more failed SC means no settlement.  As FD says, if the court date is set, and you make it clear you won't agree to a delay, and if the other side sees clearly that they will do badly at trial, then it's likely they'll make a last-minute attempt to settle, and you might be wise to consider it.

The key is that you give the other side information that will convince them they can't get what they want at trial.

So... .  how do you think they see the case - if it goes to trial - and what information is there that might convince them they will regret their failure to settle?

What I mean is, evidence that will give you a very high chance of getting what you think is right.

[seeking balance]

Or do you need to bring up this Section 271 issue each time it's relevant - not waiting til the case is over?

my attorney wrote this on every "back and forth" with ex's attorney or filing where ex was not being reasonable and showing a pattern of wasting time and money. 

It would come into play until trial, but the point was that any time the judge could see a pattern early on and us trying to settle early on that maybe sanctions would be ordered in the end.

[theodore]

Maybe you or your lawyer can ask what is new from the last SC.  If they start to go into the same details, let your lawyer stop them and ask again (and again as many times as it takes) for them to state just what's different.  Once that's done for a few times, look at your lawyer, say "there's nothing new, still an impasse" and let your lawyer concur and say "SC is ended, we tried, it failed again... .  No more conferences... .  See you in court for the trial."

What is that?  15 minutes?  A half hour?  An hour?  If there is no progress, then there's absolutely no reason to keep on for hours.  Billing kept low, your blood pressure less problematic, ex frustrated.

Remember, a real settlement often only happens just before the trial when no more delays and obstructions are possible.  My ex wasn't ready to settle until Trial Morning and I didn't know until I arrived less than 5 minutes before the scheduled start for the trial.

Beware too of her agreeing to something and then by the time you get into court to make the agreement final as an order, she has decided to renege or renegotiate.  Judges often let them do that.  Talk with your lawyer how to avoid that type of delay scenario.  We advise here to never cancel a scheduled date, not even a trial, based on promises that can be withdrawn.  If that happens then you're back where you started - and this time without a trial date.

Thanks.  That is good advice. 

I just sent my lawyer a summary of the open issues explaining both of our positions.  At the beginning of the SC, I will read that summary so that everyone in the room is on the same page.  Then, as Matt suggests, I will say: "So what are you prepared to offer that is different than what you have offered before?"

So... .  how do you think they see the case - if it goes to trial - and what information is there that might convince them they will regret their failure to settle?

What I mean is, evidence that will give you a very high chance of getting what you think is right.

There are two main arguments, amongst several smaller ones.  She is disputing the property appraisal and also claiming that I owe her over several thousand in various reimbursements.

The real estate appraisals were done by professionals that both of us agreed to and are willing to come to court if needed.  I am fairly certain we will win on that argument.

Her claim for reimbursements are offset by my claim for reimbursements.  If we push this issue, she is likely to owe me money. I am willing to call the whole thing a wash if she will back down.

If we decided to agree on anything, can I insist that we draw up a stipulation, right then and there, and have both of us sign it immediately?  I know if we don't get her signature immediately, then it didn't happen. 

[Matt]

Talk to your attorney about the "immediate stipulation" idea.  If her attorney is present at the time, that may help, because her attorney will not want to be party to an agreement that isn't honored.

Sounds like a good idea if you can make it happen - write it up and sign it right then and there.